On Thu, 12 May 2005 10:04:12 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

You need to define the particular aspect being conjugated. For example,

Hi Jim,

In fact I don't (which is the whole point of ANY characteristic being
conjugated) because it doesn't matter. There is no aspect (of what
you observe) that is without its conjugate being mirrored. However,
your presumption:
the person I see in the mirror appears to be right handed.
already disqualifies your answer.

The "effluvium" as you described it, was literally true, and
necessary. Being ignored, it has precipitated my projected
expectation:
... Computation of gain comes with the answer (and in all
likelihood so will considerable error).

The "effluvium" as you described it, was literally true as the
discussion (also anticipated) has been reduced to the frame of the
mirror (as so commonly happens in these threads) while abandoning the
substance of the conjugate mirror. This, of course, compounds the
observation above about the rapid descent into errant discussion.

Anyway, the original challenge:
What would you see if you looked into a conjugate mirror?
is meaningful within the context of the Subject line, but perhaps is a
bit too abstract (after all, it does require a knowledge of sight and
conjugation, not a simple coupling of experience). For those who
fear Shakespeare, there is only one three syllable word.

Someone may yet stumble on the answer. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC